Does anyone Develop there own film?

[Curt9339]

I know Digital cameras are the new (maybe not so new) thing now but does anyone have a darkroom and develop there own film? I used to do it in high school and I loved it. Just being in the room developing film. The feeling that you get knowing you did everything yourself just can't be beat.

[Michael Hetrick]

Lil and I used to. I think there are probably others also.

[Diamond Lil]

Mike has it right. I was limited to black and white and used to and enjoyed it tremendously. All of my hardware is still in the basement.

[Michael Hetrick]

I did Kodachrome slides also, it was pretty easy, basically making positives instead of negatives.

[LAVrod]

In college I used to develop B&W film. It was fun, but I seem to enjoy the instant gratification of digital prints more.

[Michael Hetrick]

Ya can't argue with digital as far as expediency goes. I think film is headed towards fine art such as painting and sculpture.

[Diamond Lil]

I wonder if it is still taught in high schools.

[mikep]

Probably not in high school, but surely still in college.

I did a 3 year professional photography program in college. We even made our own photo paper. That's was pretty cool.

I love digital for the ease of use, however you can't get the same tonal range or sharpness in my opinion that you get with film.

I don't really know what it is, perhaps one being all squares and the other grain. But digital seems to not have the same qualities as a fine print.

[LAVrod]

Probably not in high school, but surely still in college.

I did a 3 year professional photography program in college. We even made our own photo paper. That's was pretty cool.

I love digital for the ease of use, however you can't get the same tonal range or sharpness in my opinion that you get with film.

I don't really know what it is, perhaps one being all squares and the other grain. But digital seems to not have the same qualities as a fine print.

I agree it is different, but as is it should be understood as an entirely different beast, not necessarily as a replacement

[Michael Hetrick]

Probably not in high school, but surely still in college.

I did a 3 year professional photography program in college. We even made our own photo paper. That's was pretty cool.

I love digital for the ease of use, however you can't get the same tonal range or sharpness in my opinion that you get with film.

I don't really know what it is, perhaps one being all squares and the other grain. But digital seems to not have the same qualities as a fine print.

Wow....how do you make your own paper? That is way beyond my hobby level experience.

[Michael Hetrick]

I don't really know what it is, perhaps one being all squares and the other grain. But digital seems to not have the same qualities as a fine print.

Sorta like CD's and vinyl to me.....or better yet, a nice modeling amp versus a sweet sounding tube amp.

[mikep]

I will see if I can find some of those prints.... But basically we were doing high contrast images. I do not remember the different chemical make ups.... But you had different recipes for different tones. Almost like sepia and selenium toning. You would use a fiber paper and let it soak up the chemical solutions and dry it in the dark.

After that you would use an interneg (copy film) to make a high contrast 8x10.

You would use this the same way you make a contact sheet. Exposure times were in the minutes. And then develop and fix it.

One day maybe I'll go through some of the boxes in my basement and look for some of my old stuff.

If your are lucky I'll let you see my shoot of Cindy Crawford! :)

[Diamond Lil]

I did Kodachrome slides also, it was pretty easy, basically making positives instead of negatives.

My Uncle, my greatest motivation in photography, was always trying to get me to take the next step and go to slides...

[Diamond Lil]

I agree it is different, but as is it should be understood as an entirely different beast, not necessarily as a replacement

Functionally in society it seems to be a replacement.

[mikep]

My Uncle, my greatest motivation in photography, was always trying to get me to take the next step and go to slides...

The great thing about slides, is they are very unforgiving and force you to improve your techniques and knowledge.

Don't know if anyone here remembers the Cibachrome process, but those prints from slides looked AMAZING!

Oh... when I worked in commercial labs while going to school, developing slides was also one of the suckiest parts of the job. Nothing like standing in the dark for hours on end over warm chemicals in a very humid and smelly environment feeding rolls of slides into rollers... :(

[Michael Hetrick]

My Uncle, my greatest motivation in photography, was always trying to get me to take the next step and go to slides...

Slides were the best. You would sit down with a couple of boxes of new slides, a handheld slide viewer and a nice buzz going and be enetertained for hours. I cant tell you how many times I have been stoned staring at slides.:D

[Diamond Lil]

I used to shoot slide film and have printed only what I wanted. I never did process it in the darkroom. My biggest collection that burned in the fire was of slides.

[Vrod-Brad]

I used to develop my own B & W film like Plus-X or Tri-X. Also did a lot of color slide film too - no darkroom required!

My father worked for GAF years ago and I worked with a lot of GAF (General Analine & Film) films and B & W photo papers.

GAF now does your Shingles on your roofs etc... Remember GAF ViewMaster? The 3-D circular color slide viewer?

Brad

[Diamond Lil]

Brad, I used Plus-X and Tri-X almost exclusively back then and way before that spent an awful lot of fun time with a View Master. We still have one somewhere.

[Curt9339]

Yeah for speed Digital is great. But for fun developing in a darkroom is great.

[J. R. Weems]

I wonder if it is still taught in high schools.

The local HS had a nice darkroom but as a couple years ago they were going to get rid of it. Too Bad:( We have had trhee new houses since I had my DR-- it didn't survive.

[Diamond Lil]

I still have my head in the basement with some old Ilford paper.

[Springer]

Ilford Classic Pearl, my go to paper for large prints, Ilford does make some great paper.

[Diamond Lil]

Classic Pearl! J.B., for me that is a blast from the past. So much of my black and white was printed on that paper. It was great for portraits.

[Springer]

I tried all kinds of paper and was not real happy with the looks of them not that they were bad just not the look I wanted for 13X19 portraits. Then I got ahold of the Classic Pearl and I do like it.

[Diamond Lil]

Our high school photography teacher steered us in that direction. I never changed.

[J. R. Weems]

I have thought of late about putting in another darkroom, but to be honest, I think I have forgotten those expertise. :( Also, their is nothing available as far as equipment in this area. Can it even be bought any more? Long trips up to the city do not appeal to me either. :( Too bad. I DO have a bunch of stuff I would like to scan, and have printed though. Anyone do much of that? How about the larger negatives?

[Diamond Lil]

I've seen stuff available out on the web J. R. Film is still in use without a doubt. It is just not as easy to come by and now the pros are beginning to proclaim that digital is better.

[LunaTique]

now the pros are beginning to proclaim that digital is better.


They have arrived Kicking & Screaming . It was hard for some of them to admit to the quality of the digital camera.


Technology rocks :D

[Diamond Lil]

LT, I remember my first digital. I paid $600 for it and felt as if I'd been a victim of highway robbery! It was back in 1998. A floppy disc based Sony Mavica and it was somewhere around 1.3 megapixels. It was simply awful. It took me some convincing (see the first several posts here (http://www.moviephotoforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=10&highlight=digital)) and a very supportive group of people here to make the digital transition.

[J. R. Weems]

Lil~ Well mine was a gift for Christmas a few years back. A little Canon sure shot, something like 2.5 pixs- It was used mostly for posting photos of firearms. Still have it but it doesn't see any use since I got the little SC50 a couple years back. The SC50 is what got me turned on to the D 80, and now the D 700. Now I just need to learn how to use them :) Still, film lurks in the background. I would like to use the S2 & F2A, just for old times sake. I might even dig out the Hassy, if I cold figure out how to scan the neg's for less than my first born. :)

[Diamond Lil]

Some day someone will devise a reasonably priced scanning system.

J. R. you've come a long way from a sure shot to a full frame. If you don't mind the question, how do you like full frame in comparison to the smaller format? What differences struck you the most?

[J. R. Weems]

LIL~ Please understand, I have much to do with the full frame, and hope there are goals yet to be discovered. :) The FX format for me, will give a better print, first and foremost. The FX format camera will give me more choices than the D 80, in addition to being able to use my older lenses. I never had the options of AF or or zoom before, in fact would have nothing to do with them in the old days. Short sighted on my part? Well maybe. ?? While I think a better photo can be acquired with FX, but I may be splitting fine hairs here. I have always tried to do the best I could with whatever I was doing as just getting finished has never been my end goal. ALWAYS looking for improvement. I started blind with all this, as well as working with a computer, so it has been a lot to learn and is an ongoing task. As you know from some of the mundane questions I have ask you, I am pretty much challenged with most of this. I started blind something like 4 years ago, and it has been a long haul. Just one of the reasons this forum has been so invaluable, you, and others here who are willing to share our knowledge and not make those of us less learned feel like idiots. I continue to explore both venues and will reach for the D80 almost as often as the 700-- reason? I think either DX or FX is over the top as far as a computer goes. Sort of like adding a 500,000 addition to a simple track home. For me at least FX is, or can be a real step up when print is required. Is there that much difference when just viewed on screen? Somewhat, I guess, but they come into play for me in what is the end result, and how I get there. I have yet to use the 'LIVE VIEW' option on the 700, but hope it will help increase the end result quality. Too bad all this didn't come along 25 years ago. Still, being older, I like to think all this is keeping my mind active. :) There is just NO WAY I can ever THANK you, Ed, Mike, Erin and many others for all the help, input and just plain sharing. No one here looks down on anothers equipment, or skills, no matter what level. Members here have NOT lost sight of the fact that everyone has to start somewhere, and results do not have to be perfect for everyone to enjoy. It is hard to believe just how much talent is within the threads of this forum. All this may or may not be important, or even make sense, but it is just the way I look at it. No matter what one may seek to find in either format, I just feel there are no real boundries. Recorded information is only good to those who can use it, but what you can use today may differ greatly in what you might find use for next week. I was told years ago I should be working in a larger format, but the times, and raising a family came first. No regrets for sure, but maybe I can make up for it somewhat with the time I have left. You learn by doing, at least I do- :) To the younger crowd I would say, take PLENTY of photos, no matter what format. WHEN YOU ARRIVE AT MY AGE, YOU WILL BE GLAD YOU DID. :)
Again, allow me to just say THANKS to MAX, for having me, and each and every one of our members for posting your work. It is important to do so. Most of all, ENJOY YOURSELF!!!!!

[Diamond Lil]

Hey J. R., We are thrilled to have you here.

I appreciate your input on the FX. Print is something I have just a bit of experience with in digital. I have an awful lot to learn in that realm.

I also like your thought about no boundaries. There is just room for growth.

[J. R. Weems]

Lil~ What would be nice, would be someone to bring out a chart, or maybe there is one, I do not know. Showing, or at least giving the uninformed, like myself, comparison information.

70MM FX = 105MM DX

200MM FX = 300MM DX

This sort of thing. I have NO idea what the formula might be. :)

[EZE RIDER]

First off I have to say this forum has been enriched with the contributions to it from you MR J. R. Weems. I always look forward to your posts!

The ratio that you asked for between the FX and DX format was represented accurately by the examples you gave, it is 1.5 with the FX sensor being nearly the same size as a frame of 35mm film.

[Diamond Lil]

Okay gentlemen. I am not up on the ratios. Time for some learning. :D